The latest I can find from 'The Don' to Meg Munn >>>>>

(1) http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2008-05-01a.202148.h

(2) http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2008-05-01a.202184.h

(3) http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2008-05-01a.201167.h

(4) http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2008-05-01a.202149.h

I am left wondering if this woman will ever give in and admit defeat.

Phredd

I

Quote:

am left wondering if this woman will ever give in and admit defeat.

Phredd

....I dunno Phredd?...the lady's indolent ineptitude, slavish reliance upon the dictates of her civil servant advisors and torpid indifference to any contrary opinion is becoming quite legendendary.


_________________
...................'Jock'
Paroi...Rasah...Batu Signals Troop.

This also caught my eye >>>>

Quote:- Harriet Harmen
Wednesday 7 May—Opposition Day [11th Allotted Day][First part]. There will be a debate entitled "Safeguarding the Impartiality of the Civil Service" followed by the Chairman of Ways and Means has named opposed private business for consideration, followed by, if necessary, consideration of Lords amendments. Unquote.

Have we now got them on the run

Phredd

phredd wrote:

I am left wondering if this woman will ever give in and admit defeat.

Meg Munn is part of the Labour Party problem ... they refuse to listen. And if she wants evidence of that, she should reflect on today's election results ... the worst Labour result for 40 years .... they are in 3rd place.

They need to fire people like Ms Munn if they want to recover some of the lost ground. She is an example of why they are where they are.

I'm looking forward to hearing about the next cabinet reshuffle ...

Barry


_________________
BarryF, who fought for the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia

They could certainly do with the extra 35,000 votes !

Tony


_________________
Veni vidi vinci

Ms Munn and others of her ilk are beyond belief. Leaders who blindly follow whatever is told to them are not leaders at all.

However, if an unelected committee of Civil Servants recommend a drop in pay for Ms Munn and others like her, do you think she would blindly repeat whatever she was told?

Not a b****y chance.

Stop Press: Re todays election results...........I am told on good advice that Gordon Brown is "looking in to it".


_________________
Pingat Kami - Hak Kami
651 Signal Troop,
Semengo Camp,
Kuching.

BarryF wrote:

phredd wrote:

I am left wondering if this woman will ever give in and admit defeat.

Meg Munn is part of the Labour Party problem ... they refuse to listen. And if she wants evidence of that, she should reflect on today's election results ... the worst Labour result for 40 years .... they are in 3rd place.

They need to fire people like Ms Munn if they want to recover some of the lost ground. She is an example of why they are where they are.

I'm looking forward to hearing about the next cabinet reshuffle ...

Barry

....I'll go right along with that assessment!....what it signifies is nothing more than basic laziness...rather than considering a problem or proposition on it's merit and then exercising one's intellect towards formulating an independent judgement as to the rights of the case....how much less taxing to simply rely upon the formulaic, cut-n-paste responses supplied by the hands of those Civil Service individuals, so arrogant and self absorbed, that they involuntarily interpret any question as being symptomatic of 'nuisance' or 'disaffection'....Such public employees do a disservice to the public, to the perceived image of their Ministry and inevitably, to that of their Minister....which fact I suspect the voter will indelibly impress upon several Ministers forthwith.


_________________
...................'Jock'
Paroi...Rasah...Batu Signals Troop.

I commented as follows:

David Dilley
Posted on 2 May 2008 6:48 pm

Interesting. How early were the 'earlier representations at an official level' in London and Kuala Lumpur?

The first knowledge we (fight4thePJM campaigners) have is a copy of a letter from the Malaysian Ministry of Defence dated July 2004 nothwithstanding that the 'official line from the FCO, MoD DS Sec and Cabinet office always refers to February 2005,as the starting point as it were, notwithstanding that the matter of the PJM was first mooted in the House of Lords in December 2004 and answered in January 2005 by Baroness Symonds who rejected the Malaysian Offer outright, so which dates are correct?

It is like asking specifically, how long would a piece of string need to be that would stretch from point A to point B, and being told that earlier tests were undertaken by expert advisers who assured HMG that it was long enough!

Why was a question asked of David Milliband answered by Meg Munn, who in answering previous questions asked by Don Touhig, has shown no ability to fully answer questions which asked specific points, but advised by her civil service advisers, has replied quoting outdated regulations and other strongly contested views put forward to preclude the PJM from being'formally worn', or has stated that of answering such questions would be cost prohibitive.

Mr Milliband, would you please answer in your capacity as the 'Boss'man?

Here we go again la la la la la.

David Dilley
Posted on 2 May 2008 7:46 pm

Oh dear! 1. The HD Committee recommended in 2006 that veterans should allowed to accept but not wear the Pingat Jassa Medal. Recommended to whom? Who signed the 'Official Letter' to the then Foreign Secretary?
Was it her Majesty? We have evidence that it was signed by another (also a member of the HD Committee)rather than Her Majesty in what was more of a 'departmental note/memo' which stated "The Queen had approved the HD Committee's recommendation that the PJM could be accepted but not worn, rather than the official letter from the Palace which one might have expected. The information we sought for three years, was finally obtained under the Freedom of Information Action, an application which incidentally had been vigourously opposed by the FCO and Cabinet Office. It has always been stated by the many official correspondents that the decision was Her Majesty's, impying that she had signed the decree. We have also been informed that Her Majesty's signature or initials are not to be found on any document the precludes the PJM from being worn.

2. ...."There may be further examples over the last thirty years, but the HD Committee's usual practice is not to recommend acceptance of foreign medals". A Russian medal was accepted after 40years, presumably because it was the politically correct thing to do as they were no longer regarded as enemies; and there were others. Moreover F4the PJM campaigners hold a list, including recent medals, totalling over forty, which have been accepted with no restrictions on wearing which puts paid to the oft submitted claim regarding Double Medalling and the Long Standing 5 Year rule under which medals are not considered by the HD Committee.

The Permanent Under Secretary of State at the FCO is getting herself into a 'State' with her determination not to listen to the truth or to listen to British citizens, voters all!! It will be her mistake, make no mistake about it.

And again:

David Dilley
Posted on 2 May 2008 8:17 pm

Oh dear (again). We have it on good authority that in fact double-medalling and the 5 year rule are, indeed, so important that they are arbitrarily implemented at the whim of the HD Committee. Yes, their implementation is arbitrary. Ms Munn should consult the Ceremonial Officer of the Cabinet Office, who, incidentally, is secretary of the HD Committee, to confirm the information that is held by the Fight4thepjm Campaigners and received by us from the Cabinet Office regarding the arbitrariness of those rules is a fact.

The Cabinet Office and the FCO really should get their act together.

Further to GLOman's comment regarding the acceptence of the Russian anniversary medals. It being now politically correct to accept medals from a former enemy. Having said that, when were the Malayan people ever our enemy. I'm afraid that the mouthpieces have been foisted by their own petard, yet again.

The logically piece of advice I might propose to the Government of the day and it's (advisors), is to engage brain before engaging mouth. It might help to erradicate the confusion.

Yours Aye

Arthur R-S